WTE & Recycling in Massachusetts Municipal Waste Management Association October 22, 2003 Shawn Worster Executive Director, NESWC Director, KEMA- Xenergy, Inc.

Overview Background Integrated Waste Management in Massachusetts The NESWC Experience Conclusion

BACKGROUND 351 Cities and Towns Over 6 million population Generate over 8 million tons of MSW Commonwealth has for over a decade had a Solid Waste Master Plan in place that guides municipal waste management program planning

Master Plan Goal 1990’s 10% source reduced For MSW that is generated:  46% recycled,  50% combusted with energy recovery,  4% landfilled. Since 1988, the Commonwealth maintained an overall solid waste disposal policy that attempted to limit disposal capacity to disposal need within the state

How waste was managed

Table 1-1: Where are We Relative to the 2000 Goals? Goals Recycled10%38%46% Combusted44%36%50% Landfilled46%12%4% Net Import (-) / Export (+) * 14% (+) 0% Note: Recycled includes estimates of backyard composting. Data not available. Between 1990 and 1994, Massachusetts was an overall net importer of solid waste. Massachusetts has been a net exporter of solid waste since Solid Waste Master Plan

BACKGROUND (cont) Seven waste to energy facilities Over 1/3 of Municipalities in long term contracts Over 9000 tpd of installed capacity Represents over 200 MW of generating capacity, enough to power 200,000 homes Provides almost 3 millions tons per year of much needed in state disposal capacity

Background (cont) Table 2-2: Municipal Recycling Rates Municipalities Achieving… FY95FY96FY97FY98FY9 9 > 30% % % % < 5% Not included due to incomplete data Source: Beyond 2000 Master Plan

Current Status State continues to have aggressive goals re integrated waste management Beyond 2000 Solid Waste Master Plan calls for – 70 % reduction in waste produced by the year 2010 through source reduction and recycling (60 % MSW and 88% C & D) – “... we must reduce the amount of waste produced, reuse and recycle as much as possible, take out the toxics, and dispose of what is left in a way that protects public health and the environment. “

Beyond 2000 Goals Beyond 2000 Plan included goals in – Source reduction Product Stewardship Initiative Increase backyard composting of yard, food, and paper waste. Promote Pay-As-You-Throw municipal trash programs. Promote material exchange networks and other opportunities for reuse of products. Promote source reduction concepts in building design and construction. Provide education and technical assistance to consumers and businesses on how they can reduce the amount of waste they generate.

Beyond 2000 Goals Toxicity Reduction – Use the Product Stewardship Initiative to reduce toxics in products and packaging and ensure proper post-consumer collection and recycling / reuse. – Pursue key toxics reduction legislation – Expand household hazardous products collection efforts (including convenient collection programs, local and regional permanent collection centers). – Promote Environmentally Preferable Products purchasing. – Implement the Massachusetts Zero Mercury Strategy

Beyond 2000 Goals Recycling – Product Stewardship Initiative to increase the recyclability of products and packaging. – Pursue legislation requiring that residents in multi- family units be provided with access to recycling. – Enhance enforcement of waste bans. – Promote Pay-As-You-Throw municipal trash programs. – Continue to provide grants, incentives, and other assistance to municipalities for recycling programs. – Increase efforts to expand sustainable markets for recyclables. – Implement a statewide recycling education campaign to increase participation in recycling programs.

Beyond 2000 Goals Recycling (cont) – Provide recycling education and technical assistance to businesses and the construction industry. – Ban disposal of unprocessed C&D. – Continue to support increases in Clean Environment Fund spending on recycling programs and work to eliminate provisions that limit spending flexibility.

Where we are today Fiscal pressures affecting all aspects of municipal services State has eliminated several grant programs and pulled the CEF funds Despite that, municipalities continue to provide integrated waste management services

The NESWC Experience 23 NESWC Communities 1. Acton 2. Andover 3. Arlington 4. Bedford 5. Belmont 6. Boxborough 7. Burlington 8. Carlisle 9. Dracut 10. Hamilton 11. Lexington 12. Lincoln 13. Manchester-by-the-Sea 14. North Andover 15. North Reading 16. Peabody 17. Tewksbury 18. Watertown 19. Wenham 20. Westford 21. West Newbury 22. Wilmington 23. Winchester * WNA Facility * *

Background Background North East Solid Waste Committee represents 23 communities, 450,000 citizens NESWC Communities pay among the highest tip fee in the country, $140 per ton because of a poorly negotiated contract Contract was negotiated by the state in the early 1980’s Contract has many onerous provisions, including a guaranteed annual tonnage obligation

NESWC Experience NESWC Experience Despite that, the NESWC communities have aggressively pursued recycling/source reduction programs Served as the Pilot for the statewide Municipal Recycling Assistance Program, under which communities receive a dollar amount per ton incentive payment from the state Over eight years, that program and the equipment and technical assistance grants, provided over $2 million to the NESWC Communities Served as the host site for the first permanent regional household hazardous products facility in the state, the Minuteman Facility For the past six years, have served as the host entity for the North East Region 3 Municipal Recycling Coordinator, one of a half dozen statewide

NESWC Experience NESWC Experience Current Integrated Waste Management Program includes:  5 Municipal transfer stations  Permanent regional HHP Facility - Minuteman Facility in Lexington Diverted over 150,000 gallons of HHP over past five years  Several Drop-off Recyclable Collection Sites  Most communities have leaf and yard waste composting operations  Most communities offer curbside collection of recyclables  Recycling rate system-wide over 30 %

What’s Next for NESWC? Recently completed post 2005 contract negotiations $64 per ton in 2005 No GAT requirement Waste to energy will continue to be a component of the communities’ integrated waste management programs

Conclusions For the NESWC Communities, Recycling and waste to energy are compatible components of an integrated waste management system In Massachusetts, integrated waste management consistent with the preferred hierarchy is the norm Despite significant fiscal pressure, communities continue to manage their waste thru a balanced integrated program involving source reduction, recycling/composting and disposal, primarily at waste to energy facilities Waste to energy facilities provide long term in-state disposal capacity while reducing our reliance on non- renewable fossil fuels and improving energy security

??Questions??

Contact Information Shawn Worster Executive Director, NESWC Director, KEMA-XENERGY, Inc. Ph x 247 Fax